ABSTRACT
Vivax malaria can relapse after an initial infection due to dormant liver stages of the parasite. Radical cure can prevent relapses but requires the measurement of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase enzyme (G6PD) activity to identify G6PD-deficient patients at risk of drug-induced haemolysis. In the absence of reliable G6PD testing, vivax patients are denied radical curative treatment in many places, including rural Cambodia. A novel Biosensor, 'G6PD Standard' (SD Biosensor, Republic of Korea; Biosensor), can measure G6PD activity at the point of care. The objectives of this study were to compare the G6PD activity readings using Biosensors by village malaria workers (VMWs) and hospital-based laboratory technicians (LTs), and to compare the G6PD deficiency categorization recommended by the Biosensor manufacturer with categories derived from a locally estimated adjusted male median (AMM) in Kravanh district, Cambodia. Participants were enrolled between 2021 and 2022 in western Cambodia. Each of the 28 VMWs and 5 LTs received a Biosensor and standardized training on its use. The G6PD activities of febrile patients identified in the community were measured by VMWs; in a subset, a second reading was done by LTs. All participants were tested for malaria by rapid diagnostic test (RDT). The adjusted male median (AMM) was calculated from all RDT-negative participants and defined as 100% G6PD activity. VMWs measured activities in 1344 participants. Of that total, 1327 (98.7%) readings were included in the analysis, and 68 of these had a positive RDT result. We calculated 100% activity as 6.4 U/gHb (interquartile range: 4.5 to 7.8); 9.9% (124/1259) of RDT-negative participants had G6PD activities below 30%, 15.2% (191/1259) had activities between 30% and 70%, and 75.0% (944/1259) had activities greater than 70%. Repeat measurements among 114 participants showed a significant correlation of G6PD readings (rs = 0.784, p < 0.001) between VMWs and LTs. Based on the manufacturer's recommendations, 285 participants (21.5%) had less than 30% activity; however, based on the AMM, 132 participants (10.0%) had less than 30% activity. The G6PD measurements by VMWs and LTs were similar. With the provisions of training, supervision, and monitoring, VMWs could play an important role in the management of vivax malaria, which is critical for the rapid elimination of malaria regionally. Definitions of deficiency based on the manufacturer's recommendations and the population-specific AMM differed significantly, which may warrant revision of these recommendations.
ABSTRACT
Background: The COPCOV study (chloroquine/ hydroxychloroquine prevention of coronavirus disease), which started recruitment in April 2020, is a multi-country double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial which is being conducted in healthcare facilities involved in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case management. COPCOV aims to recruit healthcare workers and other staff employed in facilities managing people with proven or suspected COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a series of engagement sessions, each involving a short presentation of the study, a section where attendees were asked to express if they would be interested in participating in such a study and which information they would need to change their view and an open Q&A section. Answers were transcribed and coded into themes by two independent investigators. Themes were derived from the data. The aims were to assess the feasibility of the study at the respective sites, to identify context-specific ethical issues, to understand concerns potential participants might have, to fine tune research procedures and to refine COPCOV information materials. They complemented other site-specific engagement, communication and public relation activities such as press releases and websites. Results: From 16 th March 2020 to 20 th January 2021, 12 engagement sessions were conducted in Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Nepal and the UK involving 213 attendees in total. The sessions were designed to encourage potential participants and research professionals not directly involved in the project to interact with those who planned the study and those conducting it. Many attendees were keen to join the study while others had concerns. Questions raised revolved around the social value and study rationale; safety of trial medications and risk-benefit balance; study design and commitments. Conclusions: These sessions helped us refine information materials, identify misunderstandings about the study as well as complement site feasibility assessments. Our experience strongly supports the use of participatory practices prior to conducting clinical trials.
ABSTRACT
Background: The COPCOV study (chloroquine/ hydroxychloroquine prevention of coronavirus disease), which started recruitment in April 2020, is a multi-country double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial which is being conducted in healthcare facilities involved in COVID-19 case management. Participants are staff employed in facilities managing people with proven or suspected COVID-19. As part of the study, we conducted a series of engagement sessions. The aims were to assess the feasibility of the study, to identify context-specific ethical issues, to understand possible concerns, to fine tune research procedures and to refine the COPCOV information materials. Methods: The COPCOV study was approved by relevant institutional review boards. The sessions described in this paper were part of the study. We conducted a series of engagement sessions, each involving a short presentation of the study, a section where attendees were asked to express their willingness to participate in such a study, which information they would need to change their view and an open Q&A section. Answers were transcribed and coded into themes by two independent investigators. Themes were derived from the data. They complemented other site-specific engagement, communication, and public relation activities such as press releases and websites. Results and conclusions: From 16 th March 2020 to 20 th January 2021, 12 engagement sessions were conducted in Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Nepal and the UK involving 213 attendees in total. Issues raised revolved around the social value and study rationale;safety of trial medications and risk-benefit balance;study design and commitments. These sessions helped us identify concerns people had, which helped us refine information materials as well as complement site feasibility assessments. Our experience strongly supports the use of participatory practices prior to conducting clinical trials.
ABSTRACT
Background: The COPCOV study (chloroquine/ hydroxychloroquine prevention of coronavirus disease), which started recruitment in April 2020, is a multi-country double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial which is being conducted in healthcare facilities involved in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case management. COPCOV aims to recruit healthcare workers and other staff employed in facilities managing people with proven or suspected COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a series of engagement sessions, each involving a short presentation of the study, a section where attendees were asked to express if they would be interested in participating in such a study and which information they would need to change their view and an open Q&A section. Answers were transcribed and coded into themes by two independent investigators. Themes were derived from the data. The aims were to assess the feasibility of the study at the respective sites, to identify context-specific ethical issues, to understand concerns potential participants might have, to fine tune research procedures and to refine COPCOV information materials. They complemented other site-specific engagement, communication and public relation activities such as press releases and websites. Results: From 16 th March 2020 to 20 th January 2021, 12 engagement sessions were conducted in Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Nepal and the UK involving 213 attendees in total. The sessions were designed to encourage potential participants and research professionals not directly involved in the project to interact with those who planned the study and those conducting it. Many attendees were keen to join the study while others had concerns. Questions raised revolved around the social value and study rationale;safety of trial medications and risk-benefit balance;study design and commitments. Conclusions: These sessions helped us refine information materials, identify misunderstandings about the study as well as complement site feasibility assessments. Our experience strongly supports the use of participatory practices prior to conducting clinical trials.
ABSTRACT
Background: There is no generally accepted methodology for in vivo assessment of antiviral activity in SARS-CoV-2 infections. Ivermectin has been recommended widely as a treatment of COVID-19, but whether it has clinically significant antiviral activity in vivo is uncertain. Methods: In a multicentre open label, randomized, controlled adaptive platform trial, adult patients with early symptomatic COVID-19 were randomized to one of six treatment arms including high-dose oral ivermectin (600 µg/kg daily for 7 days), the monoclonal antibodies casirivimab and imdevimab (600 mg/600 mg), and no study drug. The primary outcome was the comparison of viral clearance rates in the modified intention-to-treat population. This was derived from daily log10 viral densities in standardized duplicate oropharyngeal swab eluates. This ongoing trial is registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ (NCT05041907). Results: Randomization to the ivermectin arm was stopped after enrolling 205 patients into all arms, as the prespecified futility threshold was reached. Following ivermectin, the mean estimated rate of SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance was 9.1% slower (95% confidence interval [CI] -27.2% to +11.8%; n=45) than in the no drug arm (n=41), whereas in a preliminary analysis of the casirivimab/imdevimab arm it was 52.3% faster (95% CI +7.0% to +115.1%; n=10 (Delta variant) vs. n=41). Conclusions: High-dose ivermectin did not have measurable antiviral activity in early symptomatic COVID-19. Pharmacometric evaluation of viral clearance rate from frequent serial oropharyngeal qPCR viral density estimates is a highly efficient and well-tolerated method of assessing SARS-CoV-2 antiviral therapeutics in vitro. Funding: 'Finding treatments for COVID-19: A phase 2 multi-centre adaptive platform trial to assess antiviral pharmacodynamics in early symptomatic COVID-19 (PLAT-COV)' is supported by the Wellcome Trust Grant ref: 223195/Z/21/Z through the COVID-19 Therapeutics Accelerator. Clinical trial number: NCT05041907.